High CourtsSingle Bench(2020) 01 CAL CK 0231

Asit Chakraborty vs Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority & Ors

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 7 January 2020

HON’BLE JUDGES
Amrita Sinha, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petitions (WP) No. 22437 (W) Of 2019

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

17 paragraphs · 485 words

Amrita Sinha, J

Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today be taken on record.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 31st October, 2019 passed by the Secretary, KMDA whereby the prayer of the petitioner for reimbursement of balance amount of medical expenses incurred for the purpose of his liver transplantation and the cost of post operative follow up treatment was rejected.

The said order was passed in compliance of the direction passed by this Court on 28th August, 2019 in W.P. 12909 (W) of 2019.

As in the earlier writ petition, the petitioner failed to place before the court any provision of law according to which he was entitled to receive the reimbursement of the medical bills the matter was referred to the Secretary, KMDA for taking a decision in the matter.

The prayer of the petitioner was considered by the Authority. In the reasoned order, it has been mentioned that a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakh) out of the expenses of Rs.24,00,000/- and odd was made to the petitioner vide order No.241/KMDA/Trg/3PA-13/2008 dated 12th July, 2010 as per the rate of the State Government Hospital.

The petitioner was further paid a sum of Rs.90,236/- for the post operative follow up treatment of liver transplantation, on humanitarian ground, as a very special case, for the last time, as it was approved by the Hon'ble Minister-in-Charge, UD & MA Department, Government of West Bengal vide sanctioned Memo No. 15/1(2)/KMDA/Trg./3PA-13/2008 dated 7th January, 2014.

The impugned order mentions that there is no provision for reimbursement in the order/norms of KMDA.

The petitioner relies upon the 167th meeting of KMDA wherein there was a proposal for reimbursement of follow up treatment of KMDA employees. The Authority proposed that the follow up treatment of KMDA employees shall be reimbursed.

The petitioner prays for a direction upon KMDA to reimburse the aforesaid expenses.

The respondents submit that the proposal for reimbursement of medical expenses as adopted by KMDA has not been approved or accepted by the State Government.

It has been submitted that there is no provision for reimbursement of the post operative medical bills. There is a health scheme which is available to the employees of the State Government on and from the year 2008 but the said scheme is not available and/or applicable to the employees of KMDA.

Moreover, the disease which are the petitioner is suffering from is not covered under the 2008 Health Scheme.

The petitioner in the earlier writ petition as well as in the instant writ petition has miserably failed to place any provision of law permitting reimbursement of the post operative medical expenses of the employees of KMDA.

In view of the above no relief can be granted to the petitioner in the instant writ petition.

WP 22437 (W) of 2019 stands dismissed.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.